Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:07 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,670,896 times
Reputation: 14737

Advertisements

i don't self identify as any label... including "progressive"... but in any case, i am more concerned about the levels of private debt than i am public debt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Flippin AR
5,513 posts, read 5,230,375 times
Reputation: 6242
Quote:
Originally Posted by miyu View Post
People who want to lower taxes - do you care about that America is being crushed by debt? Do you?!!?
Yes, I do. But I also know, without a shadow of a doubt, that if we give our fiscally irresponsible government even MORE of our money, then they will continue to do exactly what they've been doing: borrowing even more. So the WORST THING WE CAN DO is further raise taxes.

Politicians must be forced into cutting government; they will NEVER do it unless they have no other choice.

I won't even get into the argument that by increasing taxes, you hurt the economy and often reduce revenues (see the "Laffer Curve," Laffer curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Even Obama recognized that our economy could not handle the massive tax increase that would occur if the Bush tax rates were allowed to expire, and he LOVES taxes.

The ONLY way to reduce our debt is to massively reduce the size of government, and stop politicians from wasting money on every ridiculous thing they can think of. Washington will waste taxpayer's dollars on ANY ridiculous thing, because they have NO FISCAL SENSE WHATSOEVER. They fund TREADMILLS FOR SHRIMP, a $300,000 study of whether playing FarmVille helps personal relationships, and Jello wrestling at the South Pole, for heaven's sake! And when citizens complain, politicians go after Social Security and Medicare! (Feds spent 500K running shrimp on treadmills | TG Daily)

Our federal government, if it did what it was SUPPOSED to do (defend our borders and very few other things), could do fine with 1/1,000,000,000 of its current budget. But we have allowed it to grow to the point where it wants to control and oversee absolutely EVERY MINISCULE DETAIL of every citizen's life, and where it wants to confiscate every dollar in the economy.

In short, as the Founding Fathers predicted, government will grow until it strangles the nation and the economy. We're there. Time to cut out the malignant cancer so the economy can support more than just a few ultra-rich Big Businesses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:36 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,670,896 times
Reputation: 14737
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog View Post
I won't even get into the argument that by increasing taxes, you hurt the economy and often reduce revenues (see the "Laffer Curve," Laffer curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Even Obama recognized that our economy could not handle the massive tax increase that would occur if the Bush tax rates were allowed to expire, and he LOVES taxes.
indeed you shouldn't, because the laffer curve is a weak argument which only applies at extreme levels of taxation.

and as far as spending goes, that $300k spent on farmville research may be a great symbol of government stupidity, but in practical terms, cutting out this sort of spending will do almost nothing to solve our fiscal problems. To solve our fiscal problems we'd have to cut the military severely, and cut medicare to better reflect the amount of taxes that American workers have historically paid into the system.... which means we would need to cut Medicare to less than half of its current size.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:40 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,767,183 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog View Post
I won't even get into the argument that by increasing taxes, you hurt the economy and often reduce revenues (see the "Laffer Curve," Laffer curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Even Obama recognized that our economy could not handle the massive tax increase that would occur if the Bush tax rates were allowed to expire, and he LOVES taxes.
Laffer Curve is a... curve. How do you know Bush tax cuts are at the sweet spot? And if it is, then any further tax cuts would make things worse? No?

Having said that, Obama was not keen on extending Bush tax cuts to all, certainly not to the top 5%. For the rest, it was more about suffering than the economic turn around. Did he not run a compromise with republicans on that in December?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:44 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,670,896 times
Reputation: 14737
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Laffer Curve is a... curve. How do you know Bush tax cuts are at the sweet spot?
He doesn't; it is classic bullsh*ting to say that the Bush tax cuts put us on the magical "correct" side of the laffer curve.. The laffer curve never determined the theoretical rate at which tax revenue is maximized.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,312,279 times
Reputation: 2888
They don't care enough to actually want to cut anything other than military spending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 02:56 PM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,750,216 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
They don't care enough to actually want to cut anything other than military spending.
That's where a lot of the spending is taking place. We spend about $800 billion per year on the military. That doesn't include the black listed projects and covert spending. It's easily added up to $1 trillion per year. If we can't cut there, then the rest is a joke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,545 posts, read 8,312,279 times
Reputation: 2888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
That's where a lot of the spending is taking place. We spend about $800 billion per year on the military. That doesn't include the black listed projects and covert spending. It's easily added up to $1 trillion per year. If we can't cut there, then the rest is a joke.
You could eliminate every single dollar allocated towards defense/military and we'd STILL have a budget deficit. You liberal progs don't get it at all.

Next we'll be hearing the cries of "if we only taxed all the rich more". Well guess what, even if we taxed the rich at 100%, we'd STILL have a budget deficit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 03:02 PM
 
Location: US, California - federalist
2,794 posts, read 3,673,413 times
Reputation: 484
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee View Post
People who think you can spend to get out of debt, do YOU care?
Business ventures do that all the time. How many large business ventures do you believe use cash to start that venture? Many businesses are started using the debt of venture capital.

It depends on the implementation. We merely need more market friendly public policies that engender a positive multiplier effect to ensure a positive return on that investment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 03:04 PM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,750,216 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
You could eliminate every single dollar allocated towards defense/military and we'd STILL have a budget deficit. You liberal progs don't get it at all.

Next we'll be hearing the cries of "if we only taxed all the rich more". Well guess what, even if we taxed the rich at 100%, we'd STILL have a budget deficit.
Right. That's why we need spending cuts, tax revenue increases, and entitlement reforms.

But hands of military spending?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:36 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top